Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.

Did they not explain that the rule was written in an ambiguous manner and would be rewritten to clarify that it was not the fifth rock but after the fifth rock. This was to mean the equivalent of the five rock rule but was not called the five rock rule.

Appears Raytch has the tougher road to hoe into the Elite championship.

She lost hard down the stretch in the qualifying games. And she's got Scheidegger in the QF, if she wins she'll face the obliterating force of Ms. Hasselborg.

Scheidegger will be her #1 nemesis on the road to canadian & world championships. However, when Raytch is on her game - I don't think Schiedegger can quite stand up to the Homan side. The one who can - Hasselborg. Anna & Rachel are the best shot-pelters in the women's game. Percentages & wins prove it.

On the other side - Jones waits in the bushes to ambush the winner of Laura Walker & Tirinzoni. Silvana is bolstered this season by having the mercurial Alina Paetz fire last rocks. Walker (formerly Crocker) is the young skip thrust into skipping a group of grizzled and gnarled veterans with average age around 46/47.
Laura is one of my favorite curlers, her on and off-ice demeanor is outstanding but her bugaboo is simply shot-making. She doesn't make enough!

Jones will be pleased to face either Tirinzoni or Walker in the semi - not so pleased to be confronted by either one of the shot-pelters; she'll be better served by Scheidegger although nothing is guaranteed at this point with JJ.

Overall - impressed with JJ's "new" team, Joss is delivering shots & percentages better than Jilly. Didn't expect that this soon - as Jones usually needs more time to adapt to new players & styles.
Jones is no longer able to sustain high percentages - but in this format she can win or steal games with the right shots at the right times, so 65 to 75 games can be winning games - especially in the hands of a devious, intelligent skipper.

quote:Originally posted by IN-OFF-FOR-2 Did anyone else see Jones unable to count to 5. 5 rock rule including ticking guards touching the center line. Bring out the officials she demands!!! Oh 5 rocks for the 5 rock rule........

Hopefully, it was just a senior moment.

Can't imagine any Skip, let alone any player for that matter participating in the Elite 10 not fully understanding the five - rock FGZ rule by this time.

Ironically, in February 2018, it was Jones herself who was among the first Canadian curlers to enthusiastically endorse the WCF and CC announcement that this rule would be implemented at the beginning of the 2018 - 2019 season.

Can't imagine any Skip, let alone any player for that matter participating in the Elite 10 not fully understanding the five - rock FGZ rule by this time.

Ironically, in February 2018, it was Jones herself who was among the first Canadian curlers to enthusiastically endorse the WCF and CC announcement that this rule would be implemented at the beginning of the 2018 - 2019 season.

You do know they rewrote the rule after Jones questioned it? To "after" the 5th rock was thrown. As the announcers said, she is a lawyer and you would bet she read every word of the rules before hand. They also admitted it was written wrong in the first place - but as long has it has to do with Jones - the complaining will take place.

You do know they rewrote the rule after Jones questioned it? To "after" the 5th rock was thrown. As the announcers said, she is a lawyer and you would bet she read every word of the rules before hand. They also admitted it was written wrong in the first place - but as long has it has to do with Jones - the complaining will take place.

Yes, I am well aware she graduated in 1999 and subsequently articled for several years as a non-practicing lawyer with a Winnipeg - based financial services firm.

But no, I certainly do not recall that Jones ever "questioned" the WCF and CC five-rock FGZ rule. On what date did she did this? At the same time, could you advise what this rule stated before she 'questioned " it, and how it read after it was amended.

Nobody, I'm sure, is "complaining" that she appeared to be confused last week during the Elite 10. Just seems curious, at best, that she, of all curlers, didn't understand the existing rules for that particular event.

Yes, I am well aware she graduated in 1999 and subsequently articled for several years as a non-practicing lawyer with a Winnipeg - based financial services firm.

But no, I certainly do not recall that Jones ever "questioned" the WCF and CC five-rock FGZ rule. On what date did she did this? At the same time, could you advise what this rule stated before she 'questioned " it, and how it read after it was amended.

Nobody, I'm sure, is "complaining" that she appeared to be confused last week during the Elite 10. Just seems curious, at best, that she, of all curlers, didn't understand the existing rules for that particular event.

to be honest, I cannot remember the exact wording, before they Jones called for a rule confirmation. But after they had their chat, the rule was changed to say 'AFTER' the 5th rock has been thrown.

Maybe you can find a replay on Sportsnet or the Grand Slam site.

And really, not one person on her team, the other team or the commentators questioned her why she asked for clarification. They were all happy with the outcome.

This happened during their match against Laura Walker’s team, early in the match...2nd or 3rd end.

The confusion was whether or not the special no-ticks-on-rocks-on-the-center-line rule applied up to rock 5 or after rock 5. The rule as written was apparently ambiguous on this point, and the commentators agreed that it was. They summoned the man whose rule this was (his first name was Pierre) and asked him to clarify. He told them it was supposed to be after rock 5, and as a result. Jones took her offending rock out of play and Walker put hers back where it belonged. The officials then went around and clarified it to all the other teams and they made the written wording more clear.

This happened during their match against Laura Walker’s team, early in the match...2nd or 3rd end.

The confusion was whether or not the special no-ticks-on-rocks-on-the-center-line rule applied up to rock 5 or after rock 5. The rule as written was apparently ambiguous on this point, and the commentators agreed that it was. They summoned the man whose rule this was (his first name was Pierre) and asked him to clarify. He told them it was supposed to be after rock 5, and as a result. Jones took her offending rock out of play and Walker put hers back where it belonged. The officials then went around and clarified it to all the other teams and they made the written wording more clear.

I guess my observation was based on the 5 rock rule as part of the slams a few years now that she would be familiar with it. 5 rocks has always been after 5 rocks. Regardless of the new tick rule. Sounds like a combination of miscommunication and misinterpretation of the rules.

Apparently this center-line-no-ticks rule was in its own separate portion apart from the usual free guard zone rule, and something about it made it unclear if it was supposed to be like the usual 5-rock zone rule or not.

After they replaced the rocks, Jones told Walker she was sorry, and then Walker agreed aloud that “it is confusing.”

Also, and I’m a little hazy on this part, I believe the offending tick shot was actually a mistake. They’d been trying to curl around the center line guard and wound up ticking it instead when the throw came up light.